Chaotic Arithmetic Optimization Algorithm for Optimal Sizing of Security Constrained Unit Commitment Problem in Integrated Power System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The operation of unit commitment in power systems is a challenging task, involving intricate nonlinearities and constrained optimization. The decision-making process of committing and de-committing units poses a binary problem that necessitates optimization techniques. This research introduces a novel hybrid chaotic arithmetic optimization algorithm (hCAOA) to tackle the security constraints unit commitment (SCUC) problem. The chaotic arithmetic optimization algorithm falls under the umbrella of metaheuristic optimization approaches, drawing inspiration from arithmetic operations like division, multiplication, addition, and subtraction. To address the SCUCP, the arithmetic operators are used for the optimal sizing of unit commitment problems integrated with RES and PEVs for small, medium, and large systems. Subsequently, the CAOA is applied to a test system comprising ten, to twenty thermal units with wind and PEVs case. To evaluate the efficacy of the CAOA, the algorithm's performance is tested on systems ranging from 10 to 40 units. A comprehensive set of numerical experiments is conducted to assess the effectiveness of the CAOA, and the simulation results are subjected to statistical analysis. The findings from the simulations are presented, discussed, and compared against various classical and heuristic approaches. These comparisons demonstrate the superior performance of the CAOA in solving the SCUCP problem, emphasizing its potential as an efficient optimization approach.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".